National Diet Library bans public from viewing documents on trials of U.S. servicemen
Journalist Takao Saito recently tried to view some government documents stating how U.S. soldiers should be treated when they commit crimes in Japan, but his request was denied because the government doesn’t think the public has a right to see such material:
National Diet Library officials said that there was a request from the Ministry of Justice in May, and the library decided to ban public browsing of the material on June 11.
Ministry officials said that the information could have an influence on overseas relations if it were kept public.
“It was originally material not intended for public viewing, and we took formal procedures to restrict browsing due to fears that it could affect the relationship of trust with foreign countries, as well as investigations and public trials,” a representative of the ministry’s Criminal Affairs Bureau said.
Speaking in a news conference, Saito said he would fight the decision.
“It’s a response that’s completely out of touch with the right to know and freedom of expression, and I can’t accept it,” he said.
Sato is filing a lawsuit in the hopes that he can get the government’s decision to be reversed.
| Related Posts: |
|
Wild goat invades library in Toyama Prefecture More defendants being found innocent Ex-Imperial Army officers’ plot to kill PM Yoshida in 1952: stopped by a CIA agent in their midst? |
Full RSS Feed
Finally, the Japanese Government has all but confirmed that justice dispensed to foreigners will be different to justice dispensed to Japanese nationals.
Further, the justice dispensed to foreigners will be so harsh that there are:
“fears that it could affect the relationship of trust with foreign countries, as well as investigations and public trials”
Further,
“the government doesn’t think the public has a right to see such material”
- is this because even the public in Japan would disagree with the policy?
(sry for the cock-up!)
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Have you checked the article?
http://mainichi.jp/select/jiken/news/20080822k0000m040080000c.html
It is notification to be lenient toward the American soldiers.
Exactly.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Bob – You’re on the wrong end of the spectrum.
The Japanese jail system treats U.S. Armed Forces Personnel better than Japanese prisoners, and that’s what they’re hiding the information – The Japanese government is spending more tax money on prisoners who are in the U.S. military. (non-citizens)
Refer to the Status of Forces Agreement, article 17 clause 7B.
(http://www.niraikanai.wwma.net/pages/archive/sofa.html)
U.S. Forces personnel who become prisoners in Japan get special menus including steak supplied by the U.S. armed forces, while Japanese prisoners are not allowed food from the outside. U.S. personnel also get steam heaters in their cells, while Japanese prisoners are only allowed stoves outside of their cells. They also have a different daily schedule (when it’s time for lights out and such).
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I suppose it was a knee jerk reaction… anticipating ‘harshness’.
However, why should members of US forces be shown preferential treatment?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I think it’s based on the philosophy that the U.S. Armed Forces are in Japan to protect the nation as an ally, and service members should therefore be awarded the same treatment that they would have earned back home in military facilities in the States, despite their actions. I’m not justifying it or condeming it, just pointing out that I think that’s what the underlying emphasis is in the SOFA.
Of course, from the point of view of some Japanese, it’s preferential treatment for foreign criminals, so both sides have different, conflicting viewpoints on the issue.
Foreign civilians, however, do not (should not?) receive this privilege as they are in Japan of their own will (as opposed to being stationed here). I’ve never seen any research into the comparison of standards between foreign and national prisoners, so I can’t comment on that.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Or there may be general perception that gaijin/gaikokujin is hard to please and easy to get angry .
Rate this comment:
0 
0
ponta@: The absence of anger management courses may or may not have contributed to their encarceration in the first place.
As to being hard to please, I doubt the Japanese penal sysstemhas provision for a customer feedback system.
The question remains: Why should members of US forces be shown preferential treatment?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
The question remains because there can be only speculations to this question.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
This may be a bit off tangent, but when U.S. servicemen get arrested in the Philippines, they get preferential treatment as well. And not just preferential treatment like better food etc, more like staying at the U.S. embassy instead of being locked up in your typical Philippine prison (which are definitely terrible places to be). Of course this causes public outrage and gets covered by the media. The last incident I can remember was when a serviceman was accused of rape. The media was all over it for weeks, and was all about why the serviceman was having preferential treatment. And there were even worries that they’ll let him off easy so the media even followed and even covered all the court proceedings to make sure.
So if you ask me, if the Japanese government is withholding documents, then it’s most probably because they’re going to let the servicemen off easy. And they’d rather not have any public outrage so they’re keeping it from public view. Although, yeah, it would probably be best to be transparent, but then again, I’m not too familiar with the situation.
And I can’t understand how anyone could possibly conclude that “the justice dispensed to foreigners will be so harsh…” based solely on a single very vague and ambiguous statement. It’s not too hard to imagine that “foreign countries” could refer to the U.S., they being the subject.
And lastly, I had the impression that U.S. forces were given the preferential treatment the world over, well definitely in countries that consider themselves American allies. And even if the country was not a US ally, the fact that the US is currently the foremost power in the geopolitical arena means that they have enough influence to make sure that their servicemen do get preferential treatment.
So the question shouldn’t be “Why should members of US forces be shown preferential treatment?”, but instead “Given the current status of the US in the global pecking order and it’s relations with Japan (or any other country), why wouldn’t U.S. servicemen get better treatment?”. For native people like me, I know it sucks, and is a bit depressing when foreigners get preferential treatment, but that’s just how things are.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
So might makes right, again. *sigh*
“but that’s just how things are.”
We know the way things are. We don’t have to accept it. So the question is “Why should members of US forces be shown preferential treatment?” Can they give any moral principle in support of it?
If being an “ally” of the US means we have to use kid gloves in dealing with their citizens who have committed crimes in our country, then maybe we have to seriously rethink our relationship.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
The problem is that the Philippines needs the US more than the US needs the Philippines.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
That’s what everyone thinks, but it’s not true. Even if it were, it would only prove what I was saying, that principles have nothing to do with it, just power and self-interest.
But strange as it may seem, it’s actually the other way around. The US needs the Philippines more than the Philippines needs the US.
They need us for our strategic location, especially given the rise of China.
And speaking of China…there are other countries we can go to for aid, you know? The US’s power in the world is not what it once was.
While it seems counterintuitive, it’s true. I don’t think it’s proper to look down on us in this situation, given our strategic value to continuing American hegemony.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I would honestly prefer that the Philippines stand on its own, or at least be able to play politics skillfully internationally. Or maybe grow a backbone (the bureaucrats and politicians at least). But then I guess that’s what most everybody else in the world wants for his own country. But then again there’s the Russia vs Georgia issue where Georgia’s backbone got snapped.
Anyway, I’d venture out on a limb and say that current world order with America on top order isn’t too bad. Or maybe most everyone has just gotten used to it. If China was on top instead, I’m guessing that ‘harmony’ would be the key word.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“I don’t think it’s proper to look down on us in this situation, given our strategic value to continuing American hegemony.”
Don’t get me wrong – I’m not an American. They look down on my country too. If you can tell the US where to go, and risk losing trading agreements and mutual defence, then give it a go.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Overthinker, you’re…British, right? How does it feel having your former colony above you, anyway?
Just kidding. Isn’t the UK powerful enough to pursue a divergent course of interest from the US, regardless of how much Americans look down on it?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Actually I’m not British – I’m from one of their Former Colonies. So they both look down on me….
Rate this comment:
0 
0
If it’s Canada, you ask me, the Americans should be looking up at you – north, that is.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
additional – thanks for the URL, but I am not an American.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Yea that’s definitely not right.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Tally one less for “yes” and one more for “no.” I completely misread the question. Sorry.
Rate this comment:
0 
0